Su-57 Felon

Military aircraft - Post cold war aircraft, including for example B-2, Gripen, F-18E/F Super Hornet, Rafale, and Typhoon.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

madrat

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2767
  • Joined: 03 Mar 2010, 03:12

Unread post11 Aug 2020, 18:33

Rather than one big lens, could you get good results with one fixed faceted array (akin to F-35A EOTS) on each side of the cockpit? They might resemble shark eyes. Maybe hide the cockpit as near completely as possible and use electro-optical displays.
Offline

hornetfinn

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3187
  • Joined: 13 Mar 2013, 08:31
  • Location: Finland

Unread post12 Aug 2020, 09:43

madrat wrote:Rather than one big lens, could you get good results with one fixed faceted array (akin to F-35A EOTS) on each side of the cockpit? They might resemble shark eyes. Maybe hide the cockpit as near completely as possible and use electro-optical displays.


I think it would be totally possible to not have any kind of canopy but rather have distributed cameras (maybe in several different wavelenghts) and present their picture to the pilot using the HMD or possibly having very large curved display where canopy transparency normally is. Of course there might be couple of issues with reliability and safety with such a system and pilots might prefer regular canopy. I think it would be tough to get equal situational awareness using camera+display tech instead of plain old canopy augmented with HMD display. There might be need for having some kind of backup system.

Another interesting possibility would be having wingtip mounted IRST/FLIR sensors working together. This could provide stereoscopic images and could determine ranges totally passively like old time coincidence and stereoscopic rangefinders did. With wide distance between sensors, high magnification optics, high resolution detectors and computer doing the calculations, you would get very high range resolution totally passively. Another advantage of this setup is that these sensors could work independently. For example one sensor could be tracking a target with very narrow FoV and another one could search for other targets using wider FoV. Of coourse this setup would have limitations and drawbacks also like the aircraft body blocking some viewing angles.
Offline
User avatar

sferrin

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5596
  • Joined: 22 Jul 2005, 03:23

Unread post12 Aug 2020, 23:46

boogieman wrote:
mixelflick wrote:How in the hell do you NOT use serpentine inlets? I understand the SH and others use radar blockers, but the SH wasn't built from the ground up with stealth in mind. The SU-57 was. It can't be disrupted airflow to the engines - they hold up just find during tailslides, cobra's and like maneuvers. Why no serpentine inlets?

I have heard it claimed that the Su57 actually does use an inlet design that obscures the view of the fan blades from the forward aspect in a way comparable to the set-up in the YF-23:



Will defer to others on the veracity of this claim.


The F-23 would have had carets in the intakes blocking the view to the engine face.
"There I was. . ."
Offline

marauder2048

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1314
  • Joined: 14 Mar 2012, 06:46

Unread post13 Aug 2020, 00:28

hornetfinn wrote:Another interesting possibility would be having wingtip mounted IRST/FLIR sensors working together. This could provide stereoscopic images and could determine ranges totally passively like old time coincidence and stereoscopic rangefinders did. With wide distance between sensors, high magnification optics, high resolution detectors and computer doing the calculations, you would get very high range resolution totally passively. Another advantage of this setup is that these sensors could work independently. For example one sensor could be tracking a target with very narrow FoV and another one could search for other targets using wider FoV. Of coourse this setup would have limitations and drawbacks also like the aircraft body blocking some viewing angles.


The baseline requirements for same-ship stereo imaging to any useful range are such that you'd need the B-1's wingspan.
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6856
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post13 Aug 2020, 01:28

Assembly Line Being Prepared for Production of Russian Su-57 Stealth Jet

August 12, 2020

The Komsomolsk-on-Amur Aviation Plant (KnAAZ) of Russia’s Sukhoi Corp. has started setting up a final assembly shop to integrate the Su-57 stealth fighter jet.

The information was given out by the Russian MoD when Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu paid a working visit to KnAAZ today to inspect ongoing projects.

"The factory of the company, Sukhoi in Komsomolsk-on-Amur carried out modernization and technical re-equipment of production, which allows us to successfully and timely fulfill the (Su-57) state defense order," General Director of PJSC Sukhoi Company Ilya Tarasenko was quoted as saying in a MoD announcement.

“As part of the state defense order, we plan to supply the Ministry of Defense with 76 Su-57 aircraft systems by 2028. Such workload allows us to ensure the dynamic development of the enterprise and assure jobs for our employees," he added

The Minister of Defense was shown the final assembly shop, where the preparation of the assembly line for the Su-57 jet is currently underway. A stage-by-stage implementation of a production line project for the assembly of Su-57 fighters is being carried out, the General Director said.

A contact to build 76 Su-57 aircraft by 2028 was signed at the MAKS 2019 event.

The Su-57 has completed its flight tests with the AL-41F-1S (article 117S) engine-derived from the Su-35 jet- while a superior engine, internally called the “second stage” engine is currently going through its test phases. It has not yet been revealed when this engine will be ready for assembly.

Current speculation is that, the new engine could enter production mid-way through the implementation of the order for 78 jets; which is beyond 2025 at the anticipated production rate of 12-13 aircraft per year.

https://www.defenseworld.net/news/27635 ... zSIUNGpWhM
Offline

milosh

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1108
  • Joined: 27 Feb 2008, 23:40
  • Location: Serbia, Belgrade

Unread post13 Aug 2020, 19:57

boogieman wrote:I have heard it claimed that the Su57 actually does use an inlet design that obscures the view of the fan blades from the forward aspect in a way comparable to the set-up in the YF-23:



Will defer to others on the veracity of this claim.


F-23:
https://yf-23.webs.com/Pics/F-23A/Koku% ... 201023.gif

SU-57:
https://thaimilitaryandasianregion.file ... .jpg?w=625

From side projection, intakes are almost similar expect Su-57 have variable ramp and radar blocker but if you look from top projection it is clear F-23 intake is lot more bend and have bump which act as DSI and hide engine.

Su-57 on other hand have radar blocker in intake, quite complex one from what we can see in patent, official pic of blocker will of course be classified.
Offline

hornetfinn

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3187
  • Joined: 13 Mar 2013, 08:31
  • Location: Finland

Unread post14 Aug 2020, 12:45

I think both Su-57 and J-20 emphasise just how impressive machine F-22 really is. Both are definitely way behind in many areas, especially when it comes to all-around stealth. That even when F-22 has been in operational service for about 15 years and been constantly upgraded. I think Russia really lacks money to really develop an F-22 equivalent aircraft. Both Russia and China also lack in many technological areas and manufacturing capabilities. So they developed aircraft that fit their budget and give as much capabilities as possible given their capabilities. This means some serious compromises had to be made when compared to F-22, but I think neither Su-57 or J-20 was really intended to go after F-22 or even F-35. I think they just wanted to have aircraft that was better than current advanced 4th generation aircraft.
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4130
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post14 Aug 2020, 17:48

They are doing the best they can to say they're in the "stealth" club. Unfortunately, 76 examples (IF that comes to pass) won't get them very far. 1, perhaps 2 operation squadrons when you take out all of the birds necessary for test, evaluation, weapons qualification testing etc.. They will be expensive as hell, and not capable of much more than the up-rated SU-35's that are on the way.

So it's a national prestige piece more than anything, something Vlad saw fit to push through. He needs something to SAY he has a counter to America's stealth jets, after all. Even worse, so-called lesser nations in their minds (Poland, for example) will be flying F-35's soon, an aircraft that will handily dispatch of the best Russian jets money can buy.

That has to weigh heavily on them, especially after the Flanker more or less evened the score in the air to air arena (before the F-22). They were almost at parity, at least airframe wise (never engines or avionics). And yes, I realize how important those 2 are...
Offline

milosh

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1108
  • Joined: 27 Feb 2008, 23:40
  • Location: Serbia, Belgrade

Unread post14 Aug 2020, 18:57

mixelflick wrote:They are doing the best they can to say they're in the "stealth" club. Unfortunately, 76 examples (IF that comes to pass) won't get them very far. 1, perhaps 2 operation squadrons when you take out all of the birds necessary for test, evaluation, weapons qualification testing etc.. They will be expensive as hell, and not capable of much more than the up-rated SU-35's that are on the way.


Well they will be surely lot more capable then Su-35 that is clear but cost will be lot higher. Also Russia have another heavy fighter or better say super heavy, MiG-31. Fleet of those Mach 2 locomotives cost a lot to maintain and upgrade. They can't replace them with anything else because of speed combine with range, altitude and radar capabilities.

mixelflick wrote:So it's a national prestige piece more than anything, something Vlad saw fit to push through. He needs something to SAY he has a counter to America's stealth jets, after all. Even worse, so-called lesser nations in their minds (Poland, for example) will be flying F-35's soon, an aircraft that will handily dispatch of the best Russian jets money can buy.


Well there is really no prestige left when China is pumping J-20 as sausages (half of Su-57 order just in this year), I think they are pushing Su-57 to create new tech for aircraft manufacturing, it is big leap for Sukhoi to go from not so demanding Flanker production to Su-57, even if it isn't real VLO it still demand lot more precise manufacturing then Flankers. Flanker design is simple, you do smooth surface where drag is important rest doesn't need to be build so well.

Btw such tech is needed for S-70 UCAV so investing in better quility production will help S-70 UCAV also.
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4130
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post15 Aug 2020, 18:36

Most of what you said makes sense, except the national prestige part.

Russians are justifiably proud of their past and present accomplishments. They are incredibly tough people, I would say the world's toughest. That's difficult to quantify, but considering they absorbed/lost almost 30 million people in WWII.. With respect to the SU-57, it is back in the news. Again....

Reports now indicate The Upgraded Tu-160M2 and Tu-22M3M will get the communication systems developed for the Su-57. So at this point, I've read where its new engines, avionics, comms, weapons and more are going into older Flankers and now both of their strategic bombers.

It seems like the only SU-57 that's flying operationally, is doing so as parts of other aircraft!
Offline

boogieman

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 325
  • Joined: 19 Aug 2019, 03:26

Unread post16 Aug 2020, 04:18

I think you have to view the Su-57 in the context of Putin's broader narrative ie. that he is re-establishing Russia as a global power. The size and viability of the Su57 fleet is less important to this end than the perception that it demonstrates Russian technological superiority.
Offline
User avatar

element1loop

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1545
  • Joined: 31 Dec 2015, 05:35
  • Location: Australia

Unread post16 Aug 2020, 08:29

mixelflick wrote: ... Upgraded Tu-160M2 and Tu-22M3M will get the communication systems developed for the Su-57. So at this point, I've read where its new engines, avionics, comms, weapons and more are going into older Flankers and now both of their strategic bombers.


They're copying Western approaches to increasing the leverage of legacy 4th gens we're stuck with for another transition decade, or even two (or in their case 3 or 4). If transplanting F-22 of F-35 capabilities to 4th gens was viable USAF would be doing that more. It's doing some, but no one thinks it makes them able to go toe to toe with a 5th-gen. So that's about fighting 4th-gen capabilities better, with some Su-57 sauce eventually added.
Accel + Alt + VLO + DAS + MDF + Radial Distance = LIFE . . . Always choose Stealth
Offline

hornetfinn

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3187
  • Joined: 13 Mar 2013, 08:31
  • Location: Finland

Unread post17 Aug 2020, 13:36

element1loop wrote:
mixelflick wrote: ... Upgraded Tu-160M2 and Tu-22M3M will get the communication systems developed for the Su-57. So at this point, I've read where its new engines, avionics, comms, weapons and more are going into older Flankers and now both of their strategic bombers.


They're copying Western approaches to increasing the leverage of legacy 4th gens we're stuck with for another transition decade, or even two (or in their case 3 or 4). If transplanting F-22 of F-35 capabilities to 4th gens was viable USAF would be doing that more. It's doing some, but no one thinks it makes them able to go toe to toe with a 5th-gen. So that's about fighting 4th-gen capabilities better, with some Su-57 sauce eventually added.


I don't think they are really copying Western approaches here, but they are rather forced to do so and much more so than Western countries. They don't have anything like F-35 that is very quickly (relatively) replacing 4th gen fighters in Western air forces. They have their silver bullet aircraft in Su-57 which they will get in very small numbers for such a huge country due to costs and naturally it will be their most capable jet (at least potentially). They also have relatively large number of fairly new aircraft 4th gen (if we call Su-57 5th gen) aircraft with a lof ot hours left. So upgrading their older designs with new technologies developed for Su-57 is only practical. Most Western 4th gen aircraft are much older and have seen a lot of use.

I see Russia keeping their Su-27 derivatives in use for decades to come while being periodically upgraded. Probably will produce more Su-57s at very slow rate at the same time to replace oldest aircraft. Russian economy would need some drastic measures to allow doing much more than that.
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4130
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post17 Aug 2020, 14:18

Much of what was said here makes sense.

We're going to see Flanker derivatives form the nucleus of Russia's air force for a LONG time to come. The SU-57 will only be produced in small, probably very small numbers. They're not going to come anywhere close to replacing Flankers 1:1 with the SU-57. The Hunter drone? That's doubtful too, even IF they can get the tech to work.

So I'm guessing SU-27SM2's and 3's will soldier on for at least another decade before being retired. Their SU-30/SU-35 fleet is still relatively young, so those will have to last a bit longer. Likely a lot longer, since a dedicated replacement is nowhere to be seen. Fortunately for them, the Flanker is a great platform and has room for growth. Unfortunately for them, I don't think its rated for airframe life like Western jets.

I've read SU-27's being rated for 3,000 hours and the SU-30 for 4,000 hours. In comparison, the current planned refurbishment program for the most numerous US fighter, the F-16C will extend flight hours to 10,000 (10K) or more.

Big difference..
Offline

milosh

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1108
  • Joined: 27 Feb 2008, 23:40
  • Location: Serbia, Belgrade

Unread post17 Aug 2020, 17:47

mixelflick wrote:Much of what was said here makes sense.

We're going to see Flanker derivatives form the nucleus of Russia's air force for a LONG time to come. The SU-57 will only be produced in small, probably very small numbers. They're not going to come anywhere close to replacing Flankers 1:1 with the SU-57. The Hunter drone? That's doubtful too, even IF they can get the tech to work.


Well ~80 Su-57 isn't small order for RuAF at all. They still don't have 80 Su-35. RuAF is downsizing because Russia isn't Soviet Union. They can't afford to have AF similar to USAF in fact US can't afford that only PRC can :mrgreen: but that is another topic.

mixelflick wrote:I've read SU-27's being rated for 3,000 hours and the SU-30 for 4,000 hours. In comparison, the current planned refurbishment program for the most numerous US fighter, the F-16C will extend flight hours to 10,000 (10K) or more.

Big difference..


You can extend service life on Su-27 or Su-30 but no one do that because they aren't expensive to buy.

For example Su-35 service life is 6000 hours. But why to refurbish Su-35 when new one cost RuAF something like 30 million dollars?

Back to Su-57, high res photo from asembly line of second serial Su-57:
Attachments
Su-57 serial.jpg
PreviousNext

Return to Modern Military Aircraft

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 30 guests